4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

A review of currently available in-stream water-quality models and their applicability for simulating dissolved oxygen in lowland rivers

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 314, Issue -, Pages 335-377

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0048-9697(03)00063-9

Keywords

dissolved oxygen; lowland rivers; mass balance; hydraulics; solute transport; aggregated dead zone; water quality processes; water-quality models; SIMCAT; TOMCAT; QUAL2E; QUASAR; MIKE-11; ISIS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, a review is undertaken of the major models currently in use for describing water quality in freshwater river systems. The number of existing models is large because the various studies of water quality in rivers around the world have often resulted in the construction of new 'bespoke' models designed for the particular situation of that study. However, it is worth considering models that are already available, since an existing model, suitable for the purposes of the study, will save a great deal of work and may already have been established within regulatory and legal frameworks. The models chosen here are SIMCAT, TOMCAT, QUAL2E, QUASAR, MIKE-11 and ISIS, and the potential for each model is examined in relation to the issue of simulating dissolved oxygen (DO) in lowland rivers. These models have been developed for particular purposes and this review shows that no one model can provide all of the functionality required. Furthermore, all of the models contain assumptions and limitations that need to be understood if meaningful interpretations of the model simulations are to. be made. The work is concluded with the view that it is unfair to set one model against another in terms of broad applicability, but that a model of intermediate complexity, such as QUASAR, is generally well suited to simulate DO in river systems. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available